Unknown Smurf
-
Posts
3,022 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Unknown Smurf
-
-
EDIT - DBDC has five active wars. To show exactly what I mean by "figurehead", it's their toadies that are suffering and burning for their misbehavior; they are immune to counterattack and the toadies are not. Is that really a group you should ally yourself with?
You highlight the issue many have had with Polar.. the fact that you should only have an ally because of what they can do for your alliance.
-
I think both sides have valid points. My two cents:
- Schatt needs to realize that SRA is not joining the coalition to support that side, but joining that coalition because Kashmir is being dog piled (look at the number of alliance Legion could have hit, instead they hit the smallest AA on that side that is already at war with 10mill+ NS).
- SRA should realize that even though their intentions are true every damage they incur on their opponent is going to be used by NPO/Umb/Doomsphere to dictate terms on Polarsphere, and at the end of the day peace/history/etc. will say SRA fought for the "aggressors" (first side to declare -- I'm not making a political statement here) in the conflict.
- The Legion is vastly improved militarily. In this current war the Legion is the only significant alliance on Polars side that is putting out more damage than it is taking. As for the past war, well RV said it was just NSO? Well it wasn't, it was NSO/NsO/IAA/BTA/some others and they had financial support from C&G (Not MK/Umb).. the coalition they were against had about a 300k NS advantage iirc and Legion wiped the floor with them. (But tbf the 600k IAA didn't pull its weight).
- This is probably the more civil discussion I've seen on here and I applaud both sides for that.
-
Basically this. Best of luck to my allies in SRA, not that you need it with WAR JESUS having your back. (And us too of course :) )Legion are some solid folks.
SRA, too, is pretty solid, from what I can tell from my limited interaction with them.
Have fun, both of you.
O/ -
Actually, I decommed all his military entirely. But thanks.
Oh jfc. I didn't realize how !@#$@#$ huge he was.
No wonder everyone wants to suck his dick. They don't even have to get on their knees, they could suck it standing up.
No homo.
-
Losing 10k tech and having zero infra and land wouldn't even add 20 targets total. I think you are severely underestimating the ability to add targets.
Edit: Also, the correct answer was Enderland.
You didn't remove the NS from the resulting loss of military.
-
...Something's clearly gone over my head here
Look at their forum pip.
-
Goldie sucks.
-
tl;dr LSF sucks.
-
Good luck.
Doesn't seem like you used any semblance of strategy though. Should've just hit DS, NG would've come.
-
1) it's not an eternal clause. It just says you get attacked if you leave. You can still leave though.
2) UCR has been trying to leave DL waaaay before SNX got hit. It started when SWF fake surrendered when we hit DL and then went into full PM for the entirety of the war and let the rest of DL burn.
They've been in noncommittal feeler protectorate talks with SRA since redarmy (former DL) joined SRA. It just kinda died down when a bulk of their membership left and RALeader went inactive.
3) your dum. -
obvuously you to scared to dec on me
-
Kaskus sphere calls dibs on hunter green.
-
Come by #rnr have a beer or two, maybe delcare some wars, and tell us how awesome we are.
No.
-
DBDC AND SP&TR (SPATR on web) have a oDoAP
-
Nevermind.
-
I like it too. Bold move. Anyone can defend their allies, but it takes real leadership to slam tech farms.
This.
Unironically if it comes off that way.
Daft like Jack.
-
Non-chaining treaty or not NpO didn't make a move without
MKsC&Gs blessing in the lead up to WotC and to NPO via 1V/Q days. And wavered back and forth in between. I'll admit my memory is hazy in that time period as I wasn't the most active but I was BLEU govt...Anyways point remains, NpO never ruled the world.
-
We went from the chopping block last year to apparently ruling the world six months ago, so I'm not sure what you're even getting at.
Anyone who believes Polar ever ruled the world is completely delusional. The closest was BLEU days but even then subservient to a much smaller MK who kept a leash on you named GR.
Emperor Letum, can you identify/explain the choices we/NpO made that caused alot of people to feel maligned last war being pushed into doomsphere's embrace? Can you also identify/explain the choices of NpO allies made that resulted in similar consequences for other major groups in this world?
I'd like to hear Letums response here but if he ignores you/misses this, shoot me a PM and I'll tell you what I believe it is. -
If you want to remove all alliances that "do nothing," you're going to end up with about 7-10 of us who actually shape the course of history. The various configurations of BFF unfortunately won't be included.
If you want to talk about shaping history, we need to talk about rulers, not alliances. On that list you, (un)fortunately, won't be included. Canik would be (maybe on the lower end of the top 100, but there regardless).
Anyways, you are ignoring his point. The greater polarsphere hasn't actively done anything to protect themselves. Alliances were created for mutual protection and to allow growth, in that endeavor your allies have failed. And I think some would argue that by choosing to be continually aligned with them your alliance has failed to attain any sort of longterm security.
Couldn't be more disappointed by an alliance I like, if I tried. oA to bandwagon in on a target to defend against a single warring nation who won't stand down to alliance orders. On any given Sunday, that would be reps and maybe expulsion for the offending nation. But I guess escalation was the requirement. Personally, this is garbage and setting low standards.
GK
I have to agree.
-
-
As a starstruck fanboy of Doomsphere I take offense to that.
Mock us all you will but we're 10x better than the satellites around Polar. Don't make me drag up that stats from BFF vs Sentinel, it was a friggin massacre.
"But that's just war! They're good at politics!" No. They're equally bad a politics, and you should feel bad for enabling their worthless existence.
Basically, whenever an alliance is told to get it together, they run to Polarsphere where you will coddle them for all eternity.QFT. Polar has historically aligned itself with ..less capable alliances. They are good people, don't get me wrong, but they are passive rulers at best and at the end of the day this is something you have to take into consideration. On Bob you will always have people you get along with in any alliance* but that doesn't necessarily mean you have to be allied to them.
EDIT: And to add to that I want to say that in this day and age your allies' allies do matter. If someone is awesome but all their friends suck, you shouldn't be allied to them imo.
-
In other news, I believe this to be the greatest percentage gain ever.Because 69?
-
but Invicta isn't purple. Hasn't been purple for like 5 years.
-
The irony of this post, specifically the bolded parts,is that it worked great for you and your alliance when NPO was the target. Such is the mask you wear when on the winning side. It literally reads to me, "you did not break the cycle, we did not break the cycle, you did not break the cycle, we did not break the cycle, but this time, you should totally break the cycle." Start with the man in the mirror.
Which cycle do you mean? When Umb hit NPO in DH-NPO to keep them from returning to power? Or one of the other half dozen wars before and after Umb has orchestrated against NPO?
The only real war NpO has planned to take out NPO was the last one, and they were aiming more at NG than NPO as we all know even though a lot of us like to not admit that since it'll besmirch the NPO/Umb relationship that they need to thrive.
Yet your representatives failed to convey the reason why we should align with you instead, despite us asking over and over. The holier than thou drivel doesn't work, not after last war when our offers of cooperation were discarded for a better alternative (which coincidentally seems to have resulted in this war, though).You don't have to align with anyone.
Uh, having been in that coalition myself, I seem to recall the NPO terms being a line item that Umbrella was very interested in?
But hey let's just shove that down the memory hole.Yeah but Umbrella talked to NPO just like NpO did, except NPO figured NPO+Umb is a much easier win than NPpO would have been.
Bad luck mostly.
Bad foreign policy if we're being honest here. They were so scared to go off on their own they signed with the only people who would take them and now they pay for it.
Of Sacred Texts and War
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
I think I've been fluid in the definition of the word 'coalition' or at the very least inconsistent in respect to your definition. I would consider your coalition to be your side in this war, which you may consider a front. That is to say I consider tJL/Kashmir hitting SUN, the Legion hitting them back and you guys hitting the Legion (for these purposes) separate.
So by this distinction I wouldn't argue that you support DoD's hit on Sandstorm, but you do support Kashmirs hit on a neutral alliance because they did not honor their MDP (REF: SUN-Invicta MDP).
I feel as though this implies that I am against Kashmir/tJLs hit, I would just like to point out that I am not, just stating that SRA is defacto supporting Kashmirs hit. Which I also support (the pre-empt that is). I just like playing devils advocate sometimes.